EF430056RO
STATE OF NEW YORK
DIVISION OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL
OFFICE OF RENT ADMINISTRATION
GERTZ PLAZA
92-31 UNION HALL STREET
JAMAICA, NEW YORK 11433
----------------------------------x
IN THE MATTER OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
APPEAL OF DOCKET NO.: EF430056RO
258 RIVERSIDE DRIVE CORP. RENT
ADMINISTRATOR'S DOCKET
NO.: DI430006B
PETITIONER
----------------------------------x
ORDER AND OPINION GRANTING PETITION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
IN PART AND MODIFYING RENT ADMINISTRATOR'S ORDER
On June 12, 1990 the above named petitioner-owner filed a
Petition for Administrative Review against an order of the Rent
Administrator issued May 9, 1990. The order concerned various
housing accommodations located at 258 Riverside Drive, New York,
N.Y. The Administrator directed restoration of services and
ordered a rent reduction for rent controlled tenants based on the
owner's failure to maintain required services.
The Commissioner has reviewed the record and carefully
considered that portion relevant to the issues raised by this
appeal.
This proceeding was commenced on September 1, 1989 when one
tenant filed a Statement of Complaint of Decrease in Building-Wide
Services and alleged that the owner was not maintaining certain
required services including a defective building entrance door,
frayed electrical wires throughout the building and peeling paint
and plaster in the public areas including the laundry room.
The owner was served with a copy of the complaint and afforded
an opportunity to respond. The owner filed a response on December
1, 1989 and stated that the complaint should be treated as
individual and not building-wide since only one tenant signed, that
the tenant was not entitled to a rent reduction, that the items
complained of are duplicates of items complained of in other
proceedings and that it did not currently own the building.
The Administrator ordered a physical inspection of the subject
building. The inspection was conducted on March 14, 1990 and
revealed the following:
EF430056RO
1. Defective entrance door and door lock,
2. Unsecured wires leading from roof to courtyard,
3. Peeling paint and plaster in laundry room at rear
of subject premises.
All other services complained of were found to have been
maintained.
The Administrator issued the order here under review on May 9,
1990. A $14.00 per month rent reduction was ordered for rent
controlled tenants. Rent stabilized tenants were not granted a
rent reduction but the Administrator issued an order directing
restoration of services.
On appeal the owner, as represented by counsel, states that
the order here under review should be revoked because only one
tenant filed the complaint and did not request a rent reduction.
The owner also states that the building in question is subject to
cooperative ownership and that any tenant who purchased an
apartment should not be entitled to a rent reduction. Finally, the
owner argues that the conditions cited in the complaint do not
warrant the imposition of a rent reduction. The petition was
served on the tenants on July 11, 1990.
After careful review of the evidence in the record, the
Commissioner is of the opinion that the petition should be granted
in part and the order here under review should be affirmed as
modified.
The owner is correct in that only one tenant, who is rent
stabilized, filed this complaint and did not request a rent
reduction. The Administrator should not have ordered a rent
reduction for the rent controlled tenants of the building. The
$14.00 per month rent reduction ordered in this proceeding is,
therefore, revoked.
With regard to the Administrator's directive to restore
services, the Commissioner has reviewed the complaint and the
report of the DHCR inspector. The Administrator's findings were
within the scope of the complaint and amply supported by the
physical inspection described above. That inspection was carried
out by a DHCR employee who is neither a party to this proceeding
nor an advocate. The order directing restoration of services was
correctly issued and is affirmed.
THEREFORE, pursuant to the Rent Stabilization Law and Code and
Rent and Eviction Regulations it is
ORDERED, that this petition be, and the same hereby is,
granted in part, and that the Rent Administrator's order be, and
EF430056RO
the same hereby is, affirmed as modified herein. Any arrears owed
based on the Commissioner's decision herein may be paid off in
installments of $14.00 per month or immediately if a tenant
vacates.
ISSUED:
JOSEPH A. D'AGOSTA
Deputy Commissioner